Tabcorps refusal to entice more customers into their tote pools through rebate incentives is unbelievable. We see through the Hong Kong example that expanding rebates to medium players increases turnover significantly. It's very difficult to believe increasing tote turnover is a priority given their behavior.

I think offering 10% rebates on a reasonable figure (say $400 metro racing/$200 all other events) would do wonders to revitalize the toes. Money would flood into the exotic pools.

Correct, those punters who have been forced out of betting on the tote due to rebaters cruelling any opportunity to win may have graduated to the corporates. However a new Point of Consumption Tax is soon to be levied by state governments on those corporates. Who do you suppose will pay that tax ? Punters of course, the corporates will pass the tax on by the way of reduced odds on any winner they might back.

Who do you suppose pressured governments to impose this new tax? Tabcorp have for years insisted corporate bookies should play on a level playing field. If Tabcorp wants corporates to play on a level playing field they should do away with rebates to Zeljko and his ilk and, then, some of those punters they have lost might migrate back to betting on the tote.

If rebates were withdrawn, the playing field would be level for ALL punters and many punters who they have been lost to the tote since the inception of rebates would definitely migrate back to the tote. For starters, exotic betting would increase back to what it was in the past. I recall when the daily Double held $100,000 +, today it is moderate. Tabcorp's need for a level playing field will be restored and there would be no need for a Point of Consumption Tax.

POC tax was levied to overcome corps using a tax haven - in this case the NT. The principle (if not the implementation) is sound, and smart countries are slowly recognising that's it's one of very few ways to force mega-multinational companies to partially pay their way.

Rebates are a separate issue. Rano operates on margins and it could be argued that he and TAB are together guilty of market manipulation, but "free marketeers" (lol) would claim it's nothing more than clever business. Ranogajec has picked a good time to be involved. Eventually the golden goose will stop laying.

Can't recall if the TAB merger enquiry looked at the effect of rebates - it supposedly considered the effect on small punters (lol). If it did it underestimated its effects. The Vic TAB agreement comes up for "renewal" in 2024. Hopefully a new player might upset their apple cart, although more likely RV will simply suck more money out of Tabcorp/punters and the status quo will continue.

"It’s common knowledge that rebates are offered by totes around the world to high-volume customers," a Tabcorp spokesperson said.

Citing "commercial" considerations, the gaming company wouldn’t confirm the amount it rebates to Zeljko, who is widely believed to be its biggest client. Nor would Tabcorp disclose how much had to be wagered per annum to get a rebate.

Industry insiders estimate Tabcorp is giving Zeljko a kickback of between 8 and 10 per cent. So even if Zeljko’s syndicate makes a 2 per cent loss on betting, it is well ahead of the average punter when rebates are taken into account.

Comments from Zjelko himself when asked, "How much does the syndicate turn over per year?"

"My guess would be $1 billion," was the answer.

But, as he explained to the court, it wasn’t winning that kept them way ahead of the average punter – it was the rebates or "loyalty payments".

"It’s very simple," Zeljko told the court. "If you bet $100 and lost $5, but you get a 10 per cent rebate, you still make 5 per cent."

"You always win," he said. "I’m telling you that, if you bet very large, it’s a pari-mutuel pool, you depreciate it so far that you end up getting under fair odds. If you fix something at $8, you get six, but if you get a rebate that puts you into the positive."

Given that the Fixed Odds Market always moves in line with the totalisator pools, and there is always very little difference between the two with final dividends.

There is no doubt run of the mill PUNTERS are now continually getting UNDER the true value of a horses odds, and there is also the potential for the same syndicates, with there large volume of wagering, to lay off their bets on BETFAIR, and further increase their PROFITS, by continually manipulating changes in the market.

The syndicates get over the odds, and rebates, and all other PUNTERS in the marketplace, get UNDERS and have to absorb the TAX RATES.

Has anyone done any sort of investigation into who actually owns TABCORP?

Who are the major shareholders / stakeholders? What subsidiary companies it owns, and what companies have affiliation with TABCORP.

Given that Zjelko has set up Colossus Bets, it is not outside the realms of possibility that Zjelko is associated with TABCORP in some shape or form, and has a nice little set up so that he receives the REBATES, guarantee him a situation where he can win and not lose, and he is also conveniently located offshore, to avoid the taxes via the Isle Of Man.

TABCORP can maintain it's shroud of secrecy as much as it likes, but surely it must be freely available information what companies TABCORP own, and who is in the ownership?

It would be interesting to know, because they have no interest whatsoever in changing the current arrangements, and are happy for Zjelko and Co to be a major beneficiary in their profit sharing model.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum